Ottawa Citizen » David Pugliesehttp://ottawacitizen.com
Tue, 31 Mar 2015 22:00:22 +0000enhourly1http://wordpress.com/http://0.gravatar.com/blavatar/034e689d25278f80f8281f2c424607c3?s=96&d=http%3A%2F%2Fs2.wp.com%2Fi%2Fbuttonw-com.png » David Pugliesehttp://ottawacitizen.com
U.S. Army to reduce Velcro on combat uniforms but Canadian Army keeps the same material on its clotheshttp://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/defence-watch/u-s-army-to-reduce-velcro-on-combat-uniforms-but-canadian-army-keeps-the-same-material-on-its-clothes
http://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/defence-watch/u-s-army-to-reduce-velcro-on-combat-uniforms-but-canadian-army-keeps-the-same-material-on-its-clothes#commentsTue, 19 Aug 2014 04:38:19 +0000http://ottawacitizen.com/?p=307720]]>By David Pugliese

Defence Watch

The U.S. Army is making six changes to its combat uniform that include stripping Velcro from the sleeve pocket, elbow patches, knee patches and lower leg pocket flap, the Army Times is reporting. The service is also considering five additional fixes because soldiers asked for them, Sergeant Major of the Army Raymond Chandler, the service’s top enlisted official told the newspaper.

“Velcro has been controversial,” Chandler said. “We had Velcro on the wrists and our war fighters in Iraq and Afghanistan really had some concerns with noise discipline when they were in close proximity to the enemy. So we went to a button.”

The Canadian Army, however, does not have the same concerns.

“Within the Canadian Army, current combat uniform pattern places little reliance on the use of Velcro aside from identification purposes, such as name tags,” army public affairs officer Capt. Valerie Lanouette told Defence Watch. “Although our new Enhanced Combat Uniform (ECU) design utilizes more Velcro than the current uniform it continues to use less than the US Army uniform. Primarily, the use of this product continues to be for identification purposes, as these items are not required to be manipulated in a tactical scenario during combat. To this point, there have been no complaints from soldiers about the noise made by Velcro on the current issued uniform or the ECU. The CA has taken a balanced approach on the use of this material between noise and speed of access to items in the combat uniform pockets. Buttons provide much slower access to pockets than Velcro, whereas Velcro creates more noise than buttons. Therefore, we have no plan to change the amount of Velcro on the new ECU than is currently in production.”

]]>http://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/defence-watch/u-s-army-to-reduce-velcro-on-combat-uniforms-but-canadian-army-keeps-the-same-material-on-its-clothes/feed0davidpugliese2Editorial: Government's protest surveillance is both silly and troublinghttp://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/editorial-governments-protest-surveillance-is-both-silly-and-troubling
http://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/editorial-governments-protest-surveillance-is-both-silly-and-troubling#commentsThu, 05 Jun 2014 18:27:36 +0000http://ottawacitizen.com/?p=217115]]>If the federal Government Operations Centre gets its way, an ’80s anthem from one-hit wonder Rockwell would serve nicely as the unofficial theme song of public demonstrations in Canada: “I always feel like somebody’s watching me — and I have no privacy.”

The point of a demonstration, of course, is to be seen and heard while delivering a message. If the government, which has the financial means and ability to make policy changes related to that message, gets the message loud and clear, all the better. But the information-gathering undertaken by the Government Operations Centre — uncovered by the Citizen’s David Pugliese this week — is an entirely different, and troubling, story.

The centre provides “all-hazards integrated federal emergency response to events,” which includes “24/7 monitoring and reporting, national-level situational awareness, warning products and integrated risk assessments.” If there’s an earthquake, a pandemic, a terrorist attack or similar emergency, the operations centre can gather, organize and facilitate the free flow of information between federal departments. That’s good. It’s also the same organization that last year prepared a spreadsheet of Aboriginal demonstrations against fracking that included a healing dance and a “taco fundraiser.”

On Tuesday, the Government Operations Centre sent out an email to all federal departments requesting information on all known demonstrations across the country, no matter the topic.

So say a protest group, we’ll call it the National Dachshund Alliance for the Promotion of Tiny Dogs, decides to march on Parliament Hill. Should monitoring its existence fall under the GOC’s mandate? Is paying a bureaucrat to compile a list that includes the National Dachshund Alliance for the Promotion of Tiny Dogs a prudent use of taxpayers’ money?

The answer, obviously, is no.

As one of Canada’s top security and intelligence experts, Wesley Wark, told Pugliese: “The very nature of the blanket request and its unlimited scope, I think, puts it way over the line in terms of lawful activity. I think it’s a clear breach of our Charter rights.”

Let’s be clear about another thing: the Government Operations Centre serves an important purpose. It has been proven time and again that efficient communication is absolutely critical in crisis situations. But deputizing all federal departments to gather details on every protest — silly or not — serves only to tarnish the centre’s reputation.

The government has a duty to protect its citizens without tramping on their rights, without treating each individual as a potential threat. The Government Operations Centre should cease its fishing expedition immediately.

The joint Canada-U.S. North American Aerospace Defence Command wants improved surveillance systems to keep close tabs on increasing activity in the Arctic, particularly in the region’s waters, according to documents obtained by the Citizen.

Although the installation of any new systems wouldn’t take place until around 2025, the final report on what needs to be done will be presented to top military commanders on both sides of the border this spring.

The “Norad Next” initiative aims to provide direction for the alliance in the coming decades and determine what threats North America might face. It would see “the future modernization of the Norad surveillance network to provide improved multi-domain coverage, particularly in the Arctic region,” according to a May 2012 briefing paper obtained by the Citizen under the Access to Information law.

The initiative is spearheaded by Norad’s U.S. commander Gen. Charles Jacoby.

“A cornerstone of Gen. Jacoby’s direction to his staff has been to emphasize the importance of outpacing emerging capabilities of potential adversaries,” the briefing added.

Norad Next coincides with the need to replace the alliance’s inventory of aging surveillance equipment. Many of its current radars reach the end of their life cycles in the 2020-2025 time frame, according to the U.S. Department of Defense.

Norad spokeswoman Capt. Jennifer Stadnyk noted that the alliance has maintained forward operating locations in the North for many years. “Additionally, the ever-increasing numbers of vessels transiting Arctic waters emphasize the need for Norad to observe, share and act on activity in that domain,” she added in an email. “This will be studied during the Norad Next analysis.”

Members of the Permanent Joint Board of Defence, with representatives from both countries, discussed the Norad Next concept during their meeting in December.

The initiative will make recommendations only; any decision for follow on action will have to be considered and approved by Canadian and U.S. leadership, Stadnyk added.

Modernization of Norad equipment has not always gone smoothly. In 2007 the Office of the Auditor General reported that a $93 million project to modernize Canadian Norad systems had climbed to $156 million. Auditors also found that Canadian government officials ignored signs the project was in trouble and failed to strengthen their oversight on how the money was spent.

Norad was established in 1958 and has been changing to meet various security threats. In 1991, its mission was expanded to include counter-narcotics air surveillance. After the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the U.S., Norad increased its role in the security of domestic airspace. In 2006, a maritime warning function was added, with information being shared between Canada and the U.S. about vessels approaching North America as well as activities on internal waterways.

Norad’s examination of how it is to operate in the future comes at a time when interest is increasing in the Arctic as the ice pack recedes, making the region and its resources more accessible.

Last year, a Danish-American freighter became the first bulk carrier to traverse the Northwest Passage through Canada’s Arctic waters. The ship’s owners decided to take the route because the Northwest Passage is more than 1,000 nautical miles shorter than the traditional shipping route through the Panama Canal. The transit, which saved time and fuel, sparked much discussion about the increasing use of northern waters for shipping.

In February, Russian media reported that country would form a new military command by the end of this year to protect its Arctic interests. The command would be responsible for protecting Russian oil and gas fields as well as protecting the country’s shipping and fishing industries in the north.

In January, the U.S. government released its Arctic plan. It called for a survey of U.S. northern waters and shipping routes as well as the construction of more ports. In addition, the monitoring of sea ice would be improved and rules for shipping in polar waters developed.

Increasing Canada’s military presence in the Arctic and enforcing sovereignty in the region has also been a key platform for the Conservative government. Prime Minister Stephen Harper has announced various initiatives for the Arctic, which have generated highly positive publicity for his government.

But many of the projects are still years away from becoming reality and opposition MPs and some U.S. government officials have questioned whether many of the ambitious plans will see the light of day.

In addition, there have been delays and problems with the Arctic-related equipment purchases and infrastructure initiatives.

National Defence had been expecting to take delivery of the first of its Arctic/Offshore Patrol Ships in 2013. That, however, was delayed to 2015. But according to documents presented to the House of Commons that delivery will now be delayed until 2018, at least.

Plans for a naval facility at Nanisivik, Nunavut, have been scaled back because of the high cost of building in the North.

I wish to express my gratitude to David Pugliese and the Ottawa Citizen for the excellent, solidly researched series on the situation in Afghanistan. This was in-depth journalism of exemplary high quality and very timely as this is a crucial year for that beleaguered country.

Given the costs to Canada in blood and treasure, it behooves us to remain attentive to Afghanistan’s prospects and to ask what lessons can be drawn from our intervention.

We are invested in Afghans’ struggle for a better future. This must not become a forgotten war.

Gerald Schmitz

Ottawa

Former research director, House of Commons Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development